Web Development Live

Intel Corp. unveiled new features for its line of low-cost laptops for schools Wednesday, adding bigger screens and more data storage capacity as the chip maker ratchets up its rivalry with the One Laptop per Child organization, which sells a competing machine.
Intel’s new Classmate PCs _ slated to go on sale in April for between $300 and $500 _ reflect the company’s growing efforts to sell computers equipped with its own chips to schools in developing countries, a battleground for technology companies because of the millions of people there just coming online.
But the target market has expanded to include kids in the U.S. as potential users of cheaper, stripped-down machines.
Classmate PCs also are part of Intel’s push to generate interest in a new class of mobile devices the company is calling “netbooks,” which are smaller and have fewer functions than standard laptops but also use far less power and are easier to carry around.
Other tweaks to the Classmate that Intel announced Wednesday from its developer forum in Shanghai include the availability of both 7-inch and 9-inch screens, a 30 gigabyte hard disk drive and an integrated Web camera.
At the developer forum, Intel executives also rolled out five new processors under the “Atom” brand name. The chips are designed for pocket-size Internet devices. The chips come in speeds up to 1.86 gigahertz while using less than 3 watts of power.
Intel said its Classmate PCs will eventually use Atom processors.
Classmates are based on Intel’s design and include its processors, but they are built by other manufacturers and sold under a variety of brand names. The first generation went on sale in March 2007 with the 7-inch screen and fewer functions. Intel said it has sold “tens of thousands” of the machines but declined to provide more specific data.
Intel and OLPC have feuded furiously over their competing products.
The Cambridge, Mass.-based nonprofit OLPC says it has sold hundreds of thousands of its $188 machines.
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology spinoff’s low-cost XO laptop includes a microprocessor from Advanced Micro Devices Inc., the world’s No. 2 microprocessor maker behind Intel.
A short-lived truce between Intel and OLPC ended earlier this year when Intel suddenly pulled out from OLPC’s board of directors.
Intel claimed it couldn’t continue cooperating with OLPC when founder Nicholas Negroponte demanded Intel stop selling Classmates overseas. Negroponte said the dispute stemmed from Intel sales reps disparaging OLPC products while pushing Intel’s own machines.

WEB 2.0 is well established, and sites such as YouTube, Flickr,
Facebook and Digg have turned the internet from a static source of
information into a huge, interactive digital playground. But where
to next? What will the next stage of web culture - which some
people call Web 3.0 - be like?
The expectation seems to be that profound changes are on the
way. If Web 2.0 is about generating and sharing your own content,
Web 3.0 will make information less free.
Privacy fears, new forms of advertising, and restrictions
imposed by media companies will mean more digital walls, leading to
a web that’s safer but without its freewheeling edge.
One reason for this is a new realism about personal information.
Most users casually store personal information on the web - email
on webmail servers, photographs on Flickr, appointment calendars on
Google Calendar, travel plans on Dopplr, and so on.
This openness is one of the defining features of Web 2.0. But
software specialist Nat Torkington, of high-tech publishing house
O’Reilly Media, predicts a backlash.
He argues that one serious leak or theft of private data could
change opinions overnight.
“It could be a Three Mile Island of the net,” he says, referring
to the 1979 accident that turned the US public against nuclear
power.
If this happens, users will start to remove their personal
details from web services, Mr Torkington believes, or at least
impose restrictions on it.
“We’ll see a hybrid model, with software that communicates with
the web while storing private information on your own computer,” he
says. So you might use Gmail to sort through your mail but download
personal messages to a more private spot.
Regions of the web now devoted to the unhindered exchange of
information, such as YouTube and Facebook, may evolve into gated
communities where only select people have access to specific
data.
Another factor that will restrict web freedom is advertising.
According to Brian Davison, a computer scientist at Lehigh
University in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, the influence of advertising
will continue to grow. Desperate to be noticed by people whose
attention spans are a mouse-click long, advertisers will invent
ever-more devious strategies to suck the punters in.
A few tricks are around already.
Say you are trying to reach Microsoft.com but you accidentally
type Macrosoft.com. That will take you to a page for a company
whose name has nothing to do with “Macrosoft” - they’re just parked
in that domain to get more exposure. You can find something similar
at Mycrosoft.com.
Web advertising is evolving quickly. The next generation will
sneak into search results, Mr Davison says.
For example, a website that sells movie posters might worm its
way into the results for a movie review. The link might look
useful, but clicking through will bring up an advertisement. The
danger is that such activity will gum up search results, stopping
people from finding what they need.
Web advertising is likely to balloon from another direction,
too. “Blogvertising” is expected to take off in the next five years
and produce a stark change in the medium. Already, ads are showing
up on blogs.
Bloggers stand to gain more of the advertising share because
they can create custom content for their advertisers, and that is
leading to a new style of blog on which the line between editorial
and advertisement is blurred.
Federated Media, a pioneer in the business of bringing bloggers
and advertisers together, helped Samsung advertise its HD TVs by
creating a blog called Defining Moment. Sports bloggers contributed
their posts about the best moments in sports in exchange for ad
money. All advertising on the site was by Samsung.
Neil Chase, a former editor at The New York Times and now with
Federated Media, doesn’t see this blurring of ads and content as a
problem. He argues that readers are adept at figuring out the
difference between ads and editorial. Such a model may be making
good on the old web dream of free media sharing for all; bloggers
can make their writing available for free but still be compensated
for it. Music and video content could go the same way,
incorporating advertisements to support the creators.
But wall-to-wall ads are not the only way to support media on
the web, says Michael Geist at the University of Ottawa. He says
another system can work for music and video: a media-sharing tax
that makes it legal to download anything you like.
Canada already has a version of this - a levy on blank CDs and
DVDs that allows Canadians to share music files without being sued
for copyright infringement.
“The developments we’re seeing (with media sharing) aren’t going
away,” Dr Geist says. “As more companies succeed with open business
models that could be stifled by copyright laws, they’ll seek to
have their voices heard.”
When people raised on file-sharing become politicians, Dr Geist
believes, they will support legislation that encourages models of
open media sharing online. For now, though, the name of the game is
restricting access.
Technological improvements mean that more and more content can
be delivered on the web, but with increasing control exerted by the
entertainment companies.
One way this is happening is through services such as Watch Now,
from DVD-rental company Netflix. It allows subscribers to watch
movies online without having to wait for them to download, but the
movies can only be viewed on Windows Media Player, severely
limiting where and how you can watch them.
The Netflix model represents the next step in media restriction
- part of a new, closed era when more content than ever is
available on the net, but only in limited ways.
Enjoy Web 2.0 - while it lasts.
NEW SCIENTIST

WEB 2.0 is well established, and sites such as YouTube, Flickr,
Facebook and Digg have turned the internet from a static source of
information into a huge, interactive digital playground. But where
to next? What will the next stage of web culture - which some
people call Web 3.0 - be like?
The expectation seems to be that profound changes are on the
way. If Web 2.0 is about generating and sharing your own content,
Web 3.0 will make information less free.
Privacy fears, new forms of advertising, and restrictions
imposed by media companies will mean more digital walls, leading to
a web that’s safer but without its freewheeling edge.
One reason for this is a new realism about personal information.
Most users casually store personal information on the web - email
on webmail servers, photographs on Flickr, appointment calendars on
Google Calendar, travel plans on Dopplr, and so on.
This openness is one of the defining features of Web 2.0. But
software specialist Nat Torkington, of high-tech publishing house
O’Reilly Media, predicts a backlash.
He argues that one serious leak or theft of private data could
change opinions overnight.
“It could be a Three Mile Island of the net,” he says, referring
to the 1979 accident that turned the US public against nuclear
power.
If this happens, users will start to remove their personal
details from web services, Mr Torkington believes, or at least
impose restrictions on it.
“We’ll see a hybrid model, with software that communicates with
the web while storing private information on your own computer,” he
says. So you might use Gmail to sort through your mail but download
personal messages to a more private spot.
Regions of the web now devoted to the unhindered exchange of
information, such as YouTube and Facebook, may evolve into gated
communities where only select people have access to specific
data.
Another factor that will restrict web freedom is advertising.
According to Brian Davison, a computer scientist at Lehigh
University in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, the influence of advertising
will continue to grow. Desperate to be noticed by people whose
attention spans are a mouse-click long, advertisers will invent
ever-more devious strategies to suck the punters in.
A few tricks are around already.
Say you are trying to reach Microsoft.com but you accidentally
type Macrosoft.com. That will take you to a page for a company
whose name has nothing to do with “Macrosoft” - they’re just parked
in that domain to get more exposure. You can find something similar
at Mycrosoft.com.
Web advertising is evolving quickly. The next generation will
sneak into search results, Mr Davison says.
For example, a website that sells movie posters might worm its
way into the results for a movie review. The link might look
useful, but clicking through will bring up an advertisement. The
danger is that such activity will gum up search results, stopping
people from finding what they need.
Web advertising is likely to balloon from another direction,
too. “Blogvertising” is expected to take off in the next five years
and produce a stark change in the medium. Already, ads are showing
up on blogs.
Bloggers stand to gain more of the advertising share because
they can create custom content for their advertisers, and that is
leading to a new style of blog on which the line between editorial
and advertisement is blurred.
Federated Media, a pioneer in the business of bringing bloggers
and advertisers together, helped Samsung advertise its HD TVs by
creating a blog called Defining Moment. Sports bloggers contributed
their posts about the best moments in sports in exchange for ad
money. All advertising on the site was by Samsung.
Neil Chase, a former editor at The New York Times and now with
Federated Media, doesn’t see this blurring of ads and content as a
problem. He argues that readers are adept at figuring out the
difference between ads and editorial. Such a model may be making
good on the old web dream of free media sharing for all; bloggers
can make their writing available for free but still be compensated
for it. Music and video content could go the same way,
incorporating advertisements to support the creators.
But wall-to-wall ads are not the only way to support media on
the web, says Michael Geist at the University of Ottawa. He says
another system can work for music and video: a media-sharing tax
that makes it legal to download anything you like.
Canada already has a version of this - a levy on blank CDs and
DVDs that allows Canadians to share music files without being sued
for copyright infringement.
“The developments we’re seeing (with media sharing) aren’t going
away,” Dr Geist says. “As more companies succeed with open business
models that could be stifled by copyright laws, they’ll seek to
have their voices heard.”
When people raised on file-sharing become politicians, Dr Geist
believes, they will support legislation that encourages models of
open media sharing online. For now, though, the name of the game is
restricting access.
Technological improvements mean that more and more content can
be delivered on the web, but with increasing control exerted by the
entertainment companies.
One way this is happening is through services such as Watch Now,
from DVD-rental company Netflix. It allows subscribers to watch
movies online without having to wait for them to download, but the
movies can only be viewed on Windows Media Player, severely
limiting where and how you can watch them.
The Netflix model represents the next step in media restriction
- part of a new, closed era when more content than ever is
available on the net, but only in limited ways.
Enjoy Web 2.0 - while it lasts.
NEW SCIENTIST

Four widely divergent scientific innovations are finalists in the international $1.8 million Millennium Technology Prize from the Technology Academy of Finland.
The inventions _ DNA fingerprinting, biomaterials for human tissue regeneration, key elements in mobile communication and fiber optic networks _ were created by six scientists, the academy said Tuesday.
The winning innovation, to be announced on June 11, will receive $1.2 million, and the three runners up $180,000 each.
Sir Alec Jeffreys, a professor in the genetics department at the University Leicester in Britain, is nominated for the invention of DNA fingerprinting.
“No other development in modern genetics has had such a profound impact worldwide on the lives of many millions of people,” the academy said.
Finalist Robert Langer _ an Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor who works with the Harvard-MIT Division of Health Sciences and Technology, a collaborative of the two universities _ was cited for “development of innovative biomaterials for controlled drug release and tissue regeneration.” The academy said his technology has “saved and improved the lives of millions of people.”
Andrew J. Viterbi, a professor emeritus at the University of Southern California, was chosen for the invention of the Viterbi algorithm, “the key building element in modern wireless and digital communications systems.”
And three scientists were cited for the fourth innovation, the erbium-doped fiber amplifier, which made possible high-capacity optical fiber networks: Emmanuel Desurvire, with Thales Corporate Research %26amp; Technology in France; Randy Giles, with Bell Labs in Murray Hill, N.J.; and David N. Payne, from a professor at the University of Southampton in Britain.
The prize, launched by the Finnish government and industry in 2004, rewards achievements in four categories: energy and the environment, communications and information, new materials and processes, and health care and life sciences.
Previous winners include Japanese professor Shuji Nakamura for inventions in laser technology and LED lighting and Tim Berners-Lee, the MIT scientist credited with inventing the World Wide Web.
____
On the Net: http://www.millenniumprize.fi